Cheating or Aggressive Base Running?

[radness]

Simply to clarify,

There are times when umpires have to make a judgment call based on whether they think something may have been intentful or not.
That is a part of the job.

 

[Strike2]

I could probably deal with my kid playing for a coach that utilizes shoe tying and pitching changes to run out the clock on a hard stop game, but not a coach who teaches missing bases. Honestly, being a coach myself, I wouldn't allow my kid to even play for a coach that teaches the kids to leave early.

Nothing wrong with using an available conference, pitching around someone for a walk, or telling a batter to make the most of their at-bat, but I always saw things such as shoe tying as transparent and lame. A team once tried a pitching change mid-count with three balls in a drop-dead pool game. Although, the next pitcher's first pitch was head high, and the batter "Kelly Leak'ed" it into RCF for the win.

Deliberately leaving early only works repeatedly with a single umpire. With 2+ umpires, you might get away with it once, but when people call it out, most umpires will start looking for it. None of that is in the area code of teaching runners to cut well inside a bag while rounding.

 

[Greatdaytobeawildcat]

To the second paragraph here. I have a legitimate question. Why is missing a base (or not tagging on a fly ball) an appeal call? Does anyone know? Is it so that the umpire isn't required to be watching that while having other responsibilities in the game?

This is conjecture (I'm sure there's some historical reason), but the 4 appeals (missing base, leaving base on caught fly ball, batting out of order, and rounding first base) are all correctable...the runner can go back and touch the base, or go back and tag up, or the correct batter can assume the count, or the runner can go back to first base). When would the "automatic" call be made? If the defense doesn't appeal, the offense can correct these "mistakes" up until the next play (sort of, look back rule throws that a little, or entering the dugout)...but that's my best guess anyway.

 

[PapaBear]

Simply to clarify,

There are times when umpires have to make a judgment call based on whether they think something may have been intentful or not.
That is a part of the job.

Control the game. You don’t need an appeal of you see the violation.

 

[marriard]

To the second paragraph here. I have a legitimate question. Why is missing a base (or not tagging on a fly ball) an appeal call? Does anyone know? Is it so that the umpire isn't required to be watching that while having other responsibilities in the game?

Umpires are meant to be watching whether they touch/leave a base because if we were not, then we couldn't make a call on the appeal. In fact these responsibilities are specifically called out in the manual (one reason I have to do the jog around the bases with the home run hitter to make sure they touch the bases properly).

It is an appeal call I believe because for the most part the runner can correct their mistake during live play.
In other words, they don't want the umpire to make a call or indicate that a runner missed a base while the ball is alive to avoid tipping the runner off that they have made a mistake. Specially because they can (in most cases) return to that base to correct their error and also other runners may be running and so on (same idea for tag ups/returning to tag up).

Also - the rule is written for the more usual case where they just missed the bag versus what happened here (where you would just expect a simple appeal).
That is just an educated guess - I am sure it comes from some baseball rule written in the mid-1920's or something.

 

[marriard]

Control the game. You don’t need an appeal of you see the violation.

That is not what the rules very specifically say in the case of appeal plays.

 

[canyonjoe]

I think the umps handled it right. I also think that on the sliding scale of gamesmanship versus outright cheating this pretty close the end of outright cheating. If the kid missed by a foot it could be explained, but missing this much shows it was highly likely planned.

 

[PapaBear]

That is not what the rules very specifically say in the case of appeal plays.

My stance was not the appeal rule, but seeing a blatant game violation and having to wait and see if someone is going to question it. Basically allowing a team to cheat the game you're in control of. If a ump can call a stepping out of the box or illegal pitch they can call a kid missing a bag by 10 feet.

 

[GIMNEPIWO]

My stance was not the appeal rule, but seeing a blatant game violation and having to wait and see if someone is going to question it. Basically allowing a team to cheat the game you're in control of. If a ump can call a stepping out of the box or illegal pitch they can call a kid missing a bag by 10 feet.

Not in every rule set associated with this game that I am aware of. If an Umpire does that they are acting contrary to the rules that they are there to make sure are being followed.

 

[_MIA_]

What if the kid had a medical condition which caused her to become disoriented..would you still be calling on the umpire to call it without appeal..?

Some of you would complain about expanding the strike zone to get a game moving along but now want the umpire to impose their will in this case..cannot have it both ways.